Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Science education curriculum standards are in part a political process including conflicting philosophies, values, and priorities for what science knowledge is most worth knowing. In this article we specify some of these conflicts by using an example of "Science for All Americans" (SFAA), a project sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Formed in 1848, the association is the world's largest federation of scientific and engineering societies and has over 140,000 members. We used interviews with 20 persons (e.g., teachers, teacher educators, policy makers curriculum developers) to find key issues of potential support and opposition. Interest groups concerned with these controversial issues are examined, as well as the crucial actors and institutions for policy approval at the state and local levels. Our focus is on formal policy making rather than classroom implementation. We conclude that political coalitions supporting SFAA will require a great deal of political analysis and mobilization. This will take time, but SFAA was established with a long-term perspective.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kirst et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: